|
Cream-of-Plenty posted:As I understand it, most of Morrowind's background was the brainchild of a single, very talented person. The reasons why s/he left the company are contested, but I have reason to believe this person was abducted by aliens before they started work on Oblivion. Thus, Morrowind exists as a permanent concessionary clause, i.e., "Bethesda has some of the worst writers in the industry. They've never been able to write a compelling storyline, except Morrowind," or, "Bethesda doesn't give a good goddamn about plot or setting...except for Morrowind." I don't think any one writer ever claimed to do everything in Morrowind, and it seems unlikely given the amount of factions and lore. It's just that their writing staff in general had a much different look while making Morrowind and has slowly been replaced by a totally different staff in the present day. I also think that Bethesda has a really, really hard time pleasing both the people who love their lore and the action-craving modern gamer who skips most dialog. I think I've even started becoming this type of gamer, because I simply am not willing to register the amount of time needed to learn most game stories in detail as I get older. Giggily posted:The world building kind of went downhill for a bit though, at least until they decided to play Skyrim straight. The original plans for Oblivion's setting were, uh, a little different than what we woud up with. I'm not sure who made the decision to transform the Roman Empire living in the Amazon rainforest with dinosaurs into generic fantasy England, but I don't think they made a good choice. I think trying to predict what Bethesda's next game is going to look like after Skyrim is silly, honestly, but it seems like you're being overly critical. Skyrim's world design took a bunch of large steps over its predecessors, I tend to remember quite a few areas in Morrowind being identical to one another and the world design actually being noticably small if you turned off fog of war. If anything Morrowind was just as bad as Oblivion at creating many, many non-notable dungeons and mines, but Oblivion tends to get called out on this more because its cookie areas were not as interesting to look at. Skyrim is guilty of this too to some degree, but I definitely felt like more areas existed with purposes and interesting things to discover at the end or along the way. Blackreach is also a better setting than Red Mountain in Morrowind, imo. SheepNameKiller fucked around with this message at Apr 20, 2012 around 18:24 |
| # ? Apr 20, 2012 18:10 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2013 10:13 |
|
|
I've said something like this before in several threads, but I've decided my dream game would be Obsidian getting the Skyrim engine and making, essentially, Morrowind: New Vivec. Also, I want a pony. 
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2012 19:06 |
|
|
Giggily posted:The world building kind of went downhill for a bit though, at least until they decided to play Skyrim straight. The original plans for Oblivion's setting were, uh, a little different than what we woud up with. I'm not sure who made the decision to transform the Roman Empire living in the Amazon rainforest with dinosaurs into generic fantasy England, but I don't think they made a good choice. I'm guessing this had at least a little to do with Oblivion scheduled to launch with the XBox 360. It was delayed of course, but since the 360 already had so many lackluster launch titles, Romans in Jurassic Park probably wasn't going to sell (as amazing as it sounds now)
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2012 19:15 |
|
|
balakadaka posted:I'm guessing this had at least a little to do with Oblivion scheduled to launch with the XBox 360. It was delayed of course, but since the 360 already had so many lackluster launch titles, Romans in Jurassic Park probably wasn't going to sell (as amazing as it sounds now) Psh. If dark elves and air squid in mushroom land could be a huge surprise hit on the XBOX, I don't see any reason why jungle byzantium wouldn't have been just as successful as Oblivion was. I credit it to either a failure of the will/imagination from someone higher up at Bethesda or a deliberate dumbing down.
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2012 19:21 |
|
|
SheepNameKiller posted:I don't think any one writer ever claimed to do everything in Morrowind, and it seems unlikely given the amount of factions and lore. It's just that their writing staff in general had a much different look while making Morrowind and has slowly been replaced by a totally different staff in the present day. I also think that Bethesda has a really, really hard time pleasing both the people who love their lore and the action-craving modern gamer who skips most dialog. I think I've even started becoming this type of gamer, because I simply am not willing to register the amount of time needed to learn most game stories in detail as I get older. I spoke in hyperbole, but people like Michael Kirkbride--who contributed a lot to Morrowind's background, dialogue, and stories--were not participant in Oblivion's, or had significantly diminished roles. Of course, like others have said, it doesn't help that they chose the most boilerplate setting to build a game in. quote:I think trying to predict what Bethesda's next game is going to look like after Skyrim is silly, honestly, but it seems like you're being overly critical. Skyrim's world design took a bunch of large steps over its predecessors, I tend to remember quite a few areas in Morrowind being identical to one another and the world design actually being noticably small if you turned off fog of war. If anything Morrowind was just as bad as Oblivion at creating many, many non-notable dungeons and mines, but Oblivion tends to get called out on this more because its cookie areas were not as interesting to look at. Skyrim is guilty of this too to some degree, but I definitely felt like more areas existed with purposes and interesting things to discover at the end or along the way. Blackreach is also a better setting than Red Mountain in Morrowind, imo. Oblivion gets called out on it more because its dungeons and caves were composed of the same 8 or 9 pre-fab sections, and were thrown together without any care or attention. Both games had many, many dungeons that were pointless or unrewarding, but even here, there is a difference. Where Oblivion's caves and hideouts were almost universally useless to explore, Morrowind's kept the player going with just enough reward. The occasional oddity, artifact, or character could be hidden in the shadows, or on a pillar, just out of reach. And there was always something distinctly sinister about killing a bunch of smugglers and then, as you dug through their crates, discovering that they had been importing ash statues. It's not particularly fair to call Morrowind out on its "fog of war", though. It's an old game, and it was working with the graphical constraints of the time. Given the effort they put into the rest of the game, I seriously doubt Morrowind is geographically small because of artistic decisions. Nonetheless, Skyrim does look nice, and it does make the obvious efforts to "reinvent the cave", so to speak. They also really hit the nail on the head with the exterior locations, like the sulfur pits and frozen coasts. While Bethesda is poo poo for dialogue and plot, they can make a drat pretty game that's enjoyable to explore. I know they're accused of stealing inspiration from other sources, but I personally don't care, so long as the end product is attractive and compelling to walk around in.
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2012 19:58 |
|
|
The least cynical explanation I can think of for Oblivion and Fallout 3 is that, after Morrowind, Bethesda realized that hiring like six people to read cliche RPG dialogue would be just as appealing as Morrowind's rich walls of text to different, but more numerous, people. I can't really fault them for that; if you can achieve similar amounts of success with less work, it would be bad business not to do that. Though, I'll admit, there were quests in Oblivion I legitimately liked. The "house" mission in the Dark Brotherhood line. The painting thing. Uh. That's all I can think of, but I don't think I've played the game since 2007 or 2008.
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2012 20:29 |
|
|
thehumandignity posted:I can't really fault them for that; if you can achieve similar amounts of success with less work, it would be bad business not to do that. I can because gently caress "good business".
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2012 20:31 |
|
|
thehumandignity posted:The least cynical explanation I can think of for Oblivion and Fallout 3 is that, after Morrowind, Bethesda realized that hiring like six people to read cliche RPG dialogue would be just as appealing as Morrowind's rich walls of text to different, but more numerous, people. I can't really fault them for that; if you can achieve similar amounts of success with less work, it would be bad business not to do that. I liked the final thieves guild quest. Just don't miss with that arrow.
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2012 20:35 |
|
|
I know this comes up every couple of pages, but I did a little Googling and dug through the thread and couldn't find it: What's that mod that changes how the game decides which faction Ulysses treats you as?
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 04:20 |
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:I can because gently caress "good business". I agree. It's really annoying, and it's a really common defense of Bioware and Bethesda games. People seem to think that instead of being real things that you can discuss and point to, good writing and unique aesthetics are magical unicorns that got eaten by a goblin named market forces because people didn't chant their names enough while clapping. The fact that it's "good business" doesn't change the fact that it's bad aesthetics or bad narrative design. We don't play video games because we admire the business acumen of the publishers. We play them because we enjoy the content created by the developers.
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 04:37 |
|
|
DemonNick posted:I agree. It's really annoying, and it's a really common defense of Bioware and Bethesda games. People seem to think that instead of being real things that you can discuss and point to, good writing and unique aesthetics are magical unicorns that got eaten by a goblin named market forces because people didn't chant their names enough while clapping. The fact that it's "good business" doesn't change the fact that it's bad aesthetics or bad narrative design. We don't play video games because we admire the business acumen of the publishers. We play them because we enjoy the content created by the developers. Yeah but that's exactly the point. We're in the minority. The majority of gamers prefer two lines of voice-acted crap than five paragraphs of well-written plot. "We don't play video games because we admire the business acumen of the publishers. We play them because we enjoy the content created by the developers" is exactly right, but if 5% of your fanbase play and enjoy your games for one reason and the other 95% play and enjoy them for another reason then it makes more sense for the publisher to appeal to them. And what you end up with is big companies like Bioware and Bethesda making that, and smaller niche companies like Obsidian making the games we want, which is exactly how the nature of the free market would predict a situation like that ending up.
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 04:45 |
|
|
vyelkin posted:Yeah but that's exactly the point. We're in the minority. The majority of gamers prefer two lines of voice-acted crap than five paragraphs of well-written plot. "We don't play video games because we admire the business acumen of the publishers. We play them because we enjoy the content created by the developers" is exactly right, but if 5% of your fanbase play and enjoy your games for one reason and the other 95% play and enjoy them for another reason then it makes more sense for the publisher to appeal to them. And what you end up with is big companies like Bioware and Bethesda making that, and smaller niche companies like Obsidian making the games we want, which is exactly how the nature of the free market would predict a situation like that ending up. The reason Skyrim is popular is absolutely not mutually exclusive with the reasons for New Vegas's relatively cultish popularity (the strong thematic roots, good quest design, reactivity, etc). We're not comparing Mass Effect to Pathologic. We're comparing mainstream American games. New Vegas has those qualities and it had an abbreviated dev cycle and it was built on technology no one involved other than that one oblivion modder had a ton of experience with. I don't see how a game that doesn't have those limitations gets off. It's not even as if New Vegas came from some tiny indie publisher or out of eastern Europe.
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 05:06 |
|
|
thehumandignity posted:The least cynical explanation I can think of for Oblivion and Fallout 3 is that, after Morrowind, Bethesda realized that hiring like six people to read cliche RPG dialogue would be just as appealing as Morrowind's rich walls of text to different, but more numerous, people. I can't really fault them for that; if you can achieve similar amounts of success with less work, it would be bad business not to do that. To summarize, I will have to agree with MrL_JaKiri. I apologize in advance if I read too much into your words. First of all, Bethesda is the developer. They are owned by parent company Zenimax. Now, I cannot comment on their internal infrastructure. I do not know how closely Zenimax is involved in the day-to-day dealings of Bethesda. I do know that Lynda Carter, wife of Zenimax CEO Robert Altman, has been providing the voices of female Nords and Orcs since Morrowind. She has done no other voice-work. Perhaps the two can be used interchangeably. Your argument relies on the assumption that games are primarily a business. I won't deny the financial component involved. People need to live. Still, I would hope games were fostered in an environment focused on something deeper than financial necessity. I believe games are capable of providing an experience unrivaled in any other media. When I play Fallout New Vegas, I get the sense that real love and care went into its creation. I cannot think of another game that forced me to weigh my decisions so gravely. How do I choose? Do I opt to support the NCR hoping that somehow the reckless expansionism favored by the current administration will fall out of favor? Do I purposefully sabotage their efforts in an attempt to discredit the warhawks responsible for the loss of so many lives? Is it even possible to stem the tide? Do the ideals the NCR was founded on have to be sacrificed? Fallout New Vegas is a work of art. It is worthy of critical analysis and appreciation. It has its rough patches, but this is a direction games should be heading in. A broad appeal and depth are not mutually exclusive. I believe we have different definitions of success. The attitude you recommend would suggest the following: Repeatedly clone popular titles in an attempt to cash-in on a perceived market. Creative risks are just that, risky. The Atari 2600 is a fine example of such "smart" business. Now of course it is possible to argue: businesses aren't stupid enough to do that again! They're not stupid enough to saturate a market with functionally identical yearly titles! At which point, I would look at the deceased Guitar Hero and Rock Band licenses owned by EA and Activision. I would gladly take smaller sustainable gains that do not devalue the IP. Merry Magpie fucked around with this message at Apr 21, 2012 around 05:18 |
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 05:13 |
|
|
I think people are undermining New Vegas' success. It sold really well, it's just that initially when the game was released all the "gaming journalists" bashed the game. They seemed to complain about the bugs, this is understandable but then when Skyrim was released it was praised for its bugs from the same people  .
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 05:25 |
|
|
vyelkin posted:Yeah but that's exactly the point. We're in the minority. The majority of gamers prefer two lines of voice-acted crap than five paragraphs of well-written plot. "We don't play video games because we admire the business acumen of the publishers. We play them because we enjoy the content created by the developers" is exactly right, but if 5% of your fanbase play and enjoy your games for one reason and the other 95% play and enjoy them for another reason then it makes more sense for the publisher to appeal to them. And what you end up with is big companies like Bioware and Bethesda making that, and smaller niche companies like Obsidian making the games we want, which is exactly how the nature of the free market would predict a situation like that ending up. FYI the whole notion that popular=low-dialogue shootfest is poorly supported by statistics, and sort of a myth passed around by gamers who like to imagine themselves as rarefied intellectual connoisseurs of writing about orcs that the sheeple just don't get. Also if the text in your videogame comes in five-paragraph blocks it's by definition not well-written. Tubgirl Cosplay fucked around with this message at Apr 21, 2012 around 05:52 |
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 05:32 |
|
|
Tubgirl Cosplay posted:FYI the whole notion that popular=low-dialogue shootfest is poorly supported by statistics, and sort of a myth passed around by gamers who like to imagine themselves as rarefied intellectual connoisseurs of writing about orcs that the sheeple just don't get. I was just using hyperbole to illustrate the other guy's point about publishers judging games by profitability rather than quality.
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 06:12 |
|
|
Merry Magpie posted:I believe we have different definitions of success. The attitude you recommend would suggest the following: Repeatedly clone popular titles in an attempt to cash-in on a perceived market. Creative risks are just that, risky. I'm not recommending anything. I'm just saying I can't exactly take Oblivion or FO3 as a personal slight in light of how many other people absolutely eat those games up and $. re: less writing = more popular: I wasn't suggesting that it would necessarily make the game more popular to do things like cut back severely on how much dialogue characters have, to give the character a magical compass instead of forcing him to talk to people and read maps and figure things out, and... Well I won't continue on this tangent. I'm not suggesting that these things would make the game more popular, just that there are enough people receptive to these changes that they will be as popular without requiring as much work. thehumandignity fucked around with this message at Apr 21, 2012 around 08:17 |
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 08:13 |
|
|
Tubgirl Cosplay posted:FYI the whole notion that popular=low-dialogue shootfest is sort of a myth passed around by gamers who like to imagine themselves as rarefied intellectual connoisseurs of writing about orcs that the sheeple just don't get.
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 09:21 |
|
|
Strudel Man posted:So...it's not that people don't like lots of writing, it's just that lots of writing is inherently bad writing. Good to know. When it comes to writing, there are no real hard-and-fast rules, and there are exceptions to everything. In general, though, writing for video games is a lot like writing for any visual medium in that big chunks of text are almost always the least effective means of communicating something to the player. There are times when having blocks of text in a game is completely appropriate, of course (and I would consider the logs scattered around NV an example of this), but in most cases, a game that has you reading five-paragraph blocks of text is probably not a very well-written game, much like how a comic whose panels are 50% word bubbles or narration boxes is probably not a very well-written comic. (Naturally, this all depends on the genre and style of a specific game; you're obviously going to have a lot of text in a text adventure, for example.) Opposing Farce fucked around with this message at Apr 21, 2012 around 11:01 |
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 10:54 |
|
|
There's only one hard-and-fast rule, and that is that every videogame ever sucks. (for someone) Many people don't like New Vegas because it's setting alone. Many people don't like Skyrim because it's setting alone. There's no pleasing everyone. Every company exists to turn a profit for someone, so is the rule of capitalism. The only metric that really matters with videogames as with music CDs, cars, or toasters is "units sold". In some industries manufacturing and design is so refined that the biggest (and practically only) difference lies in the marketing of the product. Not rarely do competing products come from the same manufacturing plant. The problem with video games is that, compared to 20 years ago, the production costs have balooned incredibly. (This is not only a problem with videogames, but it is a big problem with videogames) You generally want to get back what you invested and make a neat profit on top for your troubles to maybe do the same in the future. There are certain price expectations on videogames you can't really eclipse a lot, else nobody will buy your product, no matter how good it is. Even if the games-subforum makes you sometimes think otherwise, video games are a very small segment of luxury goods and price fluctuations on luxury goods in general can have a wide effect on the willingness to buy (as opposed to more basic goods like food and medicine, where people will be willing to pay as much as they have to in a heartbeat if necessary). The whole "quality"/branding thing of selling a videogame for $200 to a certain segment doesn't really work and will probably just get your work illegally duplicated, so you go for quantity. Remember TV? Turned it on lately at some time in the afternoon or evening? You'd be suprised what passes there as a "good story in a visual medium". The lowest common demeanor is not as high as some people think it is, and in general humans are pretty lazy animals and are rather underwhelmed than overwhelmed, especially when it comes to their free time. That being said, the writing in New Vegas is not Tolstoi either, and while the story is very engaging, a child can follow it without getting bored, it is not complicated or needs lots of concentration or background knowledge to get through, you just might appreciate it more sometimes. Remember "units sold" is the only measurement that really matters, and in fact while you can have a game done like New Vegas is done and it will not hurt sales and might even improve them in some regards, you don't need to. There are a lot of other things in the development process that are a lot more important to appeal to the widest possible audience. It is really as simple as that. Police Automaton fucked around with this message at Apr 21, 2012 around 11:45 |
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 11:42 |
|
|
Finally finished Dead Money for the second time, although I swear it's become bugged or something since the first time I played it (360). Elijah will NOT go into the vault, regardless of where I am, or the fact that I'm at 100 sneak and using a stealth boy. He just goes up to the door and then his spider sense causes the forcefields/turrets to flip on. I did manage to sneak the long way around to the elevator with all the gold bars, but Elijah still didn't take the bait. I couldn't trap him, and Christine never jacked the turrets, so I had to leave him technically "alive". He could still be out there, waiting. Plotting. 
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 14:49 |
|
|
You need to pass one of the many skill checks in your last dialogue with him to get him to take the bait.
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 17:30 |
|
|
thehumandignity posted:I'm not recommending anything. I'm just saying I can't exactly take Oblivion or FO3 as a personal slight in light of how many other people absolutely eat those games up and $. I see. Well, I stand by my argument that cutting corners and becoming creatively bankrupt has plenty of issues as well. Competition being one of them.
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 20:43 |
|
|
Captain Walker posted:You need to pass one of the many skill checks in your last dialogue with him to get him to take the bait. I'm really not a fan of how he's invincible until he gets to the door. Not allowing me to lay some C4 right along the catwalk isn't very Fallout, imho.
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 21:20 |
|
|
Merry Magpie posted:I see. Well, I stand by my argument that cutting corners and becoming creatively bankrupt has plenty of issues as well. Competition being one of them. I agree absolutely. I also don't think that they would have cut as many corners with Fallout 3 and TES IV if they didn't know people would buy them just based on name recognition.
|
| # ? Apr 21, 2012 22:43 |
|
|
This was posted in the console thread. Jesus...Christ. It's hilarious. (best Walken impression I could do in text) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9EJMO36ZAU
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 01:54 |
|
|
Cream-of-Plenty posted:I know they're accused of stealing inspiration from other sources, but I personally don't care, so long as the end product is attractive and compelling to walk around in. Man that's a dumb criticism. Who doesn't steal inspiration from other sources?
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 02:02 |
|
|
Lord Lambeth posted:Man that's a dumb criticism. Who doesn't steal inspiration from other sources? Yeah, I know, but I figured I'd throw the concession out there since somebody was complaining about it like four posts above mine.
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 02:04 |
|
|
Could someone tell me how to install mods for this game? Or link a how-to guide? I'm at a loss here and I'm having trouble finding a guide. Sorry for the dumb question, I was strictly a console gamer until very recently  VVVVVVVVVV Thanks! Whack fucked around with this message at Apr 22, 2012 around 18:07 |
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 18:04 |
|
|
Whack posted:Could someone tell me how to install mods for this game? Or link a how-to guide? I'm at a loss here and I'm having trouble finding a guide. Here you go. e: maybe extend it a bit more. You only need FOMM and whatever mods you want. Then you should install the mods on the "data" folder and use FOMM to activate them and auto-sort them (BOSS auto sort). You'll need to launch the game with FOMM always. Saoshyant fucked around with this message at Apr 22, 2012 around 18:15 |
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 18:06 |
|
|
I'm wrapping up V4 changes (minimal, mostly the Courier's Stash items) for my JSawyer mod. Are there any other issues you'd really like to see addressed?
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 18:58 |
|
|
rope kid posted:I'm wrapping up V4 changes (minimal, mostly the Courier's Stash items) for my JSawyer mod. Are there any other issues you'd really like to see addressed? I see often Brotherhood of Steel members who wear T-45d helmets to T-51b armor. Is that working as intended?
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 19:49 |
|
|
rope kid posted:I'm wrapping up V4 changes (minimal, mostly the Courier's Stash items) for my JSawyer mod. Are there any other issues you'd really like to see addressed? A version that doesn't require the GRA and Courier's Stash would be nice.
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 19:57 |
|
|
rope kid posted:I'm wrapping up V4 changes (minimal, mostly the Courier's Stash items) for my JSawyer mod. Are there any other issues you'd really like to see addressed? Make sure you check Has Backpack on the - oh you did that. Did you ever fix the bug with The Professional where (iirc) it just adds a flat 20% to all pistol crits? That and the one where Light Touch adds a flat 5% crit chance that isn't multiplied by your weapon are the only things I can think of, although the latter might be intentional. JSawyer.esp owns and I'd recommend it to most players.
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 20:15 |
|
|
I've wanted to try out Ropekid's mod but I really have no interest in picking up the Courier's Stash DLC - is it still necessary to have before you can use the mod?
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 21:47 |
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I've wanted to try out Ropekid's mod but I really have no interest in picking up the Courier's Stash DLC - is it still necessary to have before you can use the mod? Yeah, it is. Is that DLC still super cheap? I got it for like £1, just to play that mod, and it's worth it imo.
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 22:02 |
|
|
Police Automaton posted:I see often Brotherhood of Steel members who wear T-45d helmets to T-51b armor. Is that working as intended?
|
| # ? Apr 22, 2012 22:22 |
|
|
rope kid posted:I'm wrapping up V4 changes (minimal, mostly the Courier's Stash items) for my JSawyer mod. Are there any other issues you'd really like to see addressed? 1) Prevent Chet from resetting his store and losing the opportunity to buy the Courier's Stash items. I didn't even get the chance to save up enough money to buy anything more than the canteen before he restocked and they all vanished. 2) I think Certified Tech needs a fix similar to the one that Ninja got? 3) Not sure what the intended result is, but the revised weights for energy ammo are now ECP > MFC > SEC, while the original game went SEC > MFC > ECP. I kinda wish either ECPs or MFCs were the lightest since they're the least/most "compressed" when it comes to converting back and forth between types, or that all of them weighed the same proportionately. Original: 2 MFC: 0.200 3 SEC: 0.234 6 ECP: 0.150 jsawyer: 2 MFC: 0.100 3 SEC: 0.090 6 ECP: 0.120
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2012 17:01 |
|
|
Is the weird VR room in the X-13 a part of jsawyer.esp or is that something I've just brainfarted out of all my previous playthroughs?
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2012 18:24 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2013 10:13 |
|
|
Is there a way to play DLC again after you've beaten it? Like a console command to reset it? I really want to go to The Divide again and listen to Ulysses.  edit: And Graham.
3Romeo fucked around with this message at Apr 23, 2012 around 18:39 |
| # ? Apr 23, 2012 18:36 |
|
